While the new pricing is exciting the fact that they discontinued the upgrade program is not good for existing customers. Having reset the used values by quite a bit working out the cost to upgrade after selling the older gear and recapturing the depreciation, it is going to cost more than the old-upgrade plan would have. I am surprised they did not offer anything to the existing base.

Competition is a good thing however!

Anyone have speculation on the fate of the HCD lenses with the eventual move to "near full frame" sensors? HCD lenses are looking like they may share the ultimate fate of Nikon DX and Canon EF-S (of course those manufacturers are going to continue to build crop sensors for some time). I really like the HCD 28 and i am looking forward to trying out the new HCD wide zoom. the decision to upgrade to near full frame is now more difficult.

Is there any other differences between the 39 and 50 megapixel backs beside density? I am wondering if the 50 is a big enough jump in density to be that significant, especially with near full frame 60 megapixel backs next year?

Would you upgrade from an 8MP DSLR to a 10MP if EVEYTHING is identical except the megapixel count? It's a tough sell for existing 39MP owners, but an easier sell for owners of smaller file size backs.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224094\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Moving from 39mp to 50mp doesn't make sense for me, especially with the amazing quality / results that I get from Flexcolor / Phocus. 60mp or more, perhaps, but 39mp is enough to last me for a long time.

Exactly, maybe i was being too kind in my question, unless there is some major other advantage like less noise, better dynamic range, better bayer filter. Rumors were there would be some substantive advantages but i certainly have not read about any. With the new pricing if someone was about to up for a H3DII-39 now the can obviously have a H3DII-50 as you point out.

On the upgrade issue I was told I could upgrade to the H3DII-60 for the price difference, which at the time was estimated to be about $5,500 more than the old H3DII-39, now it is going to be much more depending on your resale and depreciation circumstances so i am not sure i agree with Paulsen that the new pricing makes an upgrade plan unnecessary. It certainly would have been desirable

Fascinating, it looks like the medium format market is finally starting to move...

To my eyes, this is a validation of the Nikon MX rumor, since I don't see anything else that could have set things in motion this way. The Leica S2 cannot be the reason, it is one year away and its price has not been confirmed yet...

Phaseone will have a very hard time selling P65+ backs at 40.000 US$ IMHO. You can find like new H3D39II at less than 20.000 US$ now on ebay.

Either way, it looks like waiting a few more months is probably the best thing to do.

If this is for real, it sounds like the same "Full Frame 645 format" sensor as in the Phase One P65+ back --- making the talk of Phase One having an exclusive on that sensor, and of it being a Phase One-Dalsa collaboration seem a bit of an "exaggeration".P.S. I just found official confirmation for this news:http://www.hasselblad.se/news/hasselblad-a...directions.aspx[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

From the posted link: "Nevertheless, to show that we’re not going to rest on our laurels, we’re also announcing the forthcoming H3DII-60, an even higher end camera that we’ll launch in 2009. The H3DII-60 will feature a 60 megapixel sensor that provides 94% full-frame, 645 coverage. We feel that it’s important to emphasize the 94% coverage, because, although we hear the phrase 'full-frame' being used quite frequently, no manufacturer has yet achieved true medium format full-frame.”"

Hasselblad CEO Mr. Poulsen says that even we hear the phrase 'full-frame' it's important to emphasize the 94% coverage. WHAT? You have a short memory mr. Poulsen but let me refreshen it. It was you who launched the 'full frame' just 2 years ago. H3D the worlds first full frame dslr!

While the new pricing is exciting the fact that they discontinued the upgrade program is not good for existing customers. Having reset the used values by quite a bit working out the cost to upgrade after selling the older gear and recapturing the depreciation, it is going to cost more than the old-upgrade plan would have. I am surprised they did not offer anything to the existing base.

Competition is a good thing however!

Anyone have speculation on the fate of the HCD lenses with the eventual move to "near full frame" sensors? HCD lenses are looking like they may share the ultimate fate of Nikon DX and Canon EF-S (of course those manufacturers are going to continue to build crop sensors for some time). I really like the HCD 28 and i am looking forward to trying out the new HCD wide zoom. the decision to upgrade to near full frame is now more difficult.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224091\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Don't you find it strange that Hasselblad would develop a HCD zoom lens when they fully well know that they have a larger sensor in development? I would like to hear what hasselblad is thinking with regards to this

Moving from 39mp to 50mp doesn't make sense for me, especially with the amazing quality / results that I get from Flexcolor / Phocus. 60mp or more, perhaps, but 39mp is enough to last me for a long time.

You are right, it's an easier sell for lower pixel back users.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224098\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

1. In partial defense of Hasselblad, it always said "48MM Full Frame", carefully not claiming to fill the full 645 film frame. So now Hasselblad is splitting hairs over a 1.08x crop factor in order to accuse Phase One of exaggeration, which seems like sour grapes over Phase One beating it to announcement of "645 format digital". (I wonder if Kodak is promissing Hasselblad a full 645 format 56x41.5mm sensor in a year or two, in response to Dalsa's size jump?)

2. The 44x33mm and 48x36mm formats are alive and well at Hasselblad, and offer options far less expensive than the new "near 645", so the 28mm and the brand new 35-90/4-5.6 HCD lenses still have a healthy role. In fact the decision to produce that new HCD zoom now to me confirms Hasselblad's intention to sustain two or more sensor size options for the sake of catering to different price ranges. (That zoom also fills the main FOV choice gaps that have been complained about with sub-645 sensors, but only at smaller maximum apertures than some would like.)

Six years after Canon launched its 35mm full frame line there is still a substantial market for Canon EF-S lenses, including the high end ones, for use with cameras like the new 50D. Likewise the Nikon D300 suggests that good quality DX format gear is still going strong, sustaining a market for good quality DX lenses. Likewise for the HCD lenses, I expect: the price premium for substantially larger sensors will probably never be reduced to a negligible level.

Rumors of the death of good quality lenses and bodies in formats smaller than the traditional film formats are greatly exaggerated.

(Especially when 44x33 and 48x36 are instead larger than the dominant film format!)

1. In partial defense of Hasselblad, it always said "48MM Full Frame", carefully not claiming to fill the full 645 film frame. So now Hasselblad is splitting hairs over a 1.08x crop factor in order to accuse Phase One of exaggeration,[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224275\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Medium format has finally done it, they produced too many pdfs, claiming what is full frame, what is not, why one size is better than the other, (and they all at one time or another called something that wasn't full frame full frame), so no finger pointing at Hasselblad . . . they all have done it.

They even make up new formats, True Wide, 48mm Full Frame, real 645 full frame, now we have the Hasselblad HCD crop. Cool.

So I wouldn't worry if you bought a 28mm hasselblad lens and the next sensor is larger than full frame full frame, there will just be a pdf produced that explaings it, which is a whole lot easier than actually making a new lens.

Now with Leica we have a traditional 35mm, (hey their words not mine) shape in a medium format camera. Well, I guess I should say a medium format prototype camera and if they decide to change the frame shape tomorrow, no problem, just write another pdf. But Leica can be forgiven for making a big 35mm camera because it will have the best image quality in the world, (once again their words, not mine) though I'm sure their strategic partners might take a little issue with that last statement.

I Can't wait until I'm at the next dinner party and somebody asks me what type of camera I use.

I'm goiing to say, well right now I'm using a 1.26 crop medium format but am looking forward to the 48mm HCD crop which I plan on replacing with either the true wide or the -8mm Full Frame 645 crop. I'm just waiting for the PDF's to tell me I can go pick it up.

Now that the prices are below stratospheric, I have a few questions about the H3. Does it tether and stay tethered all day without connectivity issues?

If it gets disconnected can you reconnect without restarting the computer or the like?

How long does the battery last?

Where can I find some good large sample files? (Preferably fashion shot with daylight)

Looking at their site, I am not sure why they would compare their file to a Canon (1Ds2 I think), when the Canon file looks just as good, even at ridiculous zoom levels (see below)

Probably a pipe dream, but does anyone know if these price reductions spill over to the *lenses*?

Also, does anyone know whether there is a definitive test somewhere on the web showing d.r. differences between the current backs and the Canon 1ds3? I know there is lots of hearsay, but what I am looking for is *evidence*. The pixels seem to be about the same size, no?

What about the h3dII-22? Is it going away or just not included in the new pricing scheme. I'm a 35mm shooter looking to slow down next season and shoot more high-end portraiture... so mf is an option I'm considering. But I don't need 30-something megapixels...

... I just want the lenses and the lack of an aa filter and the high sync speed.

Been looking at other mf systems, but the new prices on the blads make for a compelling argument.

Now that the prices are below stratospheric, I have a few questions about the H3. Does it tether and stay tethered all day without connectivity issues?

If it gets disconnected can you reconnect without restarting the computer or the like?

How long does the battery last?

Where can I find some good large sample files? (Preferably fashion shot with daylight)

Looking at their site, I am not sure why they would compare their file to a Canon (1Ds2 I think), when the Canon file looks just as good, even at ridiculous zoom levels (see below)Probably a pipe dream, but does anyone know if these price reductions spill over to the *lenses*?

Also, does anyone know whether there is a definitive test somewhere on the web showing d.r. differences between the current backs and the Canon 1ds3? I know there is lots of hearsay, but what I am looking for is *evidence*. The pixels seem to be about the same size, no?[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224346\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The PDF I read told me about a bigger 35 mm format. Or was it a full 30x45 format or may be a reduced 6x6?

I still think that natural format is something larger than reduced 35 mm but smaller than reduced 8x12". What do you think?

Erik

Quote

Two comments to above posts.

1. In partial defense of Hasselblad, it always said "48MM Full Frame", carefully not claiming to fill the full 645 film frame. So now Hasselblad is splitting hairs over a 1.08x crop factor in order to accuse Phase One of exaggeration, which seems like sour grapes over Phase One beating it to announcement of "645 format digital". (I wonder if Kodak is promissing Hasselblad a full 645 format 56x41.5mm sensor in a year or two, in response to Dalsa's size jump?)

2. The 44x33mm and 48x36mm formats are alive and well at Hasselblad, and offer options far less expensive than the new "near 645", so the 28mm and the brand new 35-90/4-5.6 HCD lenses still have a healthy role. In fact the decision to produce that new HCD zoom now to me confirms Hasselblad's intention to sustain two or more sensor size options for the sake of catering to different price ranges. (That zoom also fills the main FOV choice gaps that have been complained about with sub-645 sensors, but only at smaller maximum apertures than some would like.)

Six years after Canon launched its 35mm full frame line there is still a substantial market for Canon EF-S lenses, including the high end ones, for use with cameras like the new 50D. Likewise the Nikon D300 suggests that good quality DX format gear is still going strong, sustaining a market for good quality DX lenses. Likewise for the HCD lenses, I expect: the price premium for substantially larger sensors will probably never be reduced to a negligible level.

Rumors of the death of good quality lenses and bodies in formats smaller than the traditional film formats are greatly exaggerated.

(Especially when 44x33 and 48x36 are instead larger than the dominant film format!)[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224275\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank Erik,While I had seen that page some time ago, I just checked it out again.It goes on at length about resolving detail in dollar bills, but what I am most interested in is *dynamic range*. Is there someone who has tested this where the results are on the web someplace?

I am not too concerned with detail, as all modern high end cameras seem to out-resolve the paper that the images are printed on! I mean, I can not tell which camera was used by looking at a print in a gallery or a magazine or…

As such, the only thing that would really compel me to invest in MF would be DR, as the rest seems about equal when it comes to looking at prints.

I have seen some tests in a Swedish periodical for professional about a year ago. They photographed "stouffer edges" and arrived at about one stop advantage for medium format.

There are lots of discussion of dynamic range on these forums. I guess that "Panopeeper" or "Gluijk" will have a lot of input.

Best regardsErik

Quote

Thank Erik,While I had seen that page some time ago, I just checked it out again.It goes on at length about resolving detail in dollar bills, but what I am most interested in is *dynamic range*.I am not too concerned with detail, as all modern high end cameras seem to out-resolve the paper that the images are printed on! I mean, I can not tell which camera was used by looking at a print or a magazine or…[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]